"It’s Happening Here!” Anti-Trafficking Policy in the City of Ottawa – A Critical Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the last several years human trafficking has been in the political spotlight, and anti-trafficking has become a political arena on its own."Anti" projects are useful in understanding how law and policies are made.What does it mean to be against human trafficking?Using governmentality and genealogy methods, I focus on one anti-sex trafficking campaign located in Ottawa, Project imPACT, to examine how trafficking has been constructed as a coherent social problem.How does one NGO add or shape the antitrafficking narrative in the community?I consider anti-sex trafficking as an evolving phenomenon that is constantly being produced through discourse, and practices.The empirical focus helps determine how power is established and controlled related to antitrafficking, the conflation with sex work and the broader trafficking debates.In this way, government is not only policy or laws itself, but also the spaces in between and the personal lived experience of anti-trafficking.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.072 | 0.051 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".